Episode Transcript
[00:00:00] Speaker A: Foreign.
[00:00:10] Speaker B: Welcome back to the On Duties podcast, a production of the Cicerone Society. We are reading through every chapter of Cicero's great work On Duties. We hope you'll join us either in this Cambridge edition or in some other edition. Look for links in the show notes the description of this episode we are publishing weekly every Wednesday throughout 2026 and perhaps into 2027 if the need arises so we can cover the entire book. We are in video format on our YouTube channel and audio format on all other platforms. So please check us out like subscribe and share this podcast if you like it.
Let me introduce our hosts today. I am Chris Anadale. I teach philosophy at Mount St. Mary's University in Emmitsburg, Maryland. I'm joined today by Ethan Alexander Davy and Ben Peterson. Gentlemen, would you mind introducing yourselves briefly?
[00:01:05] Speaker A: Yes, Ethan Alexander Davy, I teach political science at Campbell University and one of my courses on political theory includes some of the works of Cicero on the Republican on the Laws and various other excerpts from his works.
[00:01:24] Speaker C: Well, thanks, Chris. I'm Ben Peterson and I teach political science at Abilene Christian University.
And same story for me. I teach some political theory classes and in my ancient political theory class we cover the Republic and the laws. So I'm enjoying getting a different side of Cicero in On Duties.
[00:01:41] Speaker B: Okay, thanks. Thanks very much. Really appreciate you guys who are stalwarts at our in our society and at our conference for coming on with us today and in past weeks we have read up through page 34 in this edition, the end of chapter 86 of book one. We're coming to the end of Cicero's treatment of the virtue of greatness, of spirit, and we're going to read here, I think, from section 87 through the end of section 92. Ben, would you like to begin reading? And Ethan, I'll give you first comment.
Sorry, 87.
So let's have you do 87 through 89, if you don't mind, Ben.
[00:02:23] Speaker C: Okay.
[00:02:24] Speaker D: Certainly, electioneering and the struggle for positions of honor is an altogether wretched practice. Again, Plato's words on the subject are splendid. Those who compete between themselves over who should administer the Republic act as if sailors were to fight over which of them should be principal helmsman.
Similarly, he advises us that we should consider as enemies those who take up
[00:02:47] Speaker C: arms against us, not those who want
[00:02:49] Speaker D: to protect the Republic in the way each judges best.
It was in that way that Publius Africanus and Quintus Metellus used to disagree with one another without bitterness.
Furthermore, we should not listen to those who Think we should be deeply angry with our opponents, and consider that that is what a great, spirited and courageous man does.
For nothing is more to be praised, nothing more worthy of a great and splendid man than to be easily appeased and forgiving.
Among free peoples who possess equality before the law, we must cultivate an affable temper and what is called loftiness of spirit. Otherwise, if we are angry with those who approach us when it is inconvenient or make over bold demands on us, we shall become unhelpfully and hatefully sour.
We must, however, recommend gentleness and forgiveness on the understanding that we may exercise severity for the sake of the Republic. For without that, the city cannot be governed.
Punishment and correction should never be insulting. It should be undertaken in accordance with what is useful to the Republic, not to the one who administers the punishment or reprimand.
We must be careful that the punishment should not be heavier than the offense,
[00:04:02] Speaker C: that we do not have some beaten
[00:04:05] Speaker D: when others charged with the same offense
[00:04:07] Speaker C: are not even summoned.
[00:04:09] Speaker D: It is particularly when punishing that one should restrain one's anger. A man who is angry when he goes to punish will never maintain that intermediate course between too much and too little that the peripatetics approve. They are, in fact, right to approve, if only they did not praise angriness, calling it a beneficial gift of nature.
For surely anger should be denied on all occasions. Our prayer should be that those in charge of the Republic be like the laws, which are led to punish not through anger, but through fairness.
[00:04:43] Speaker A: Okay, so there's a lot in this set of passages here. Of course, we have, again, a reference to Plato and a swipe at electioneering.
So the.
And now, of course, Cicero had to engage in election electioneering as a senator. They were elected, and one had to develop a pretty solid patronage network to get elected.
But it is, I suppose, expected of the gentleman to view this as a dirty enterprise to try to have to win favor in this way.
But of course, as a gentleman statesman, in which the top positions are elective, one does have to take into account public opinion. And also, again, in the Roman Republic, they are ruling over free men, not slaves. And so I think that's part of where this discussion of anger comes in.
One does not treat members of the Republic, citizens as though they were nothing, as though they didn't have rights. Right?
They have equality before the law. As citizens, they deserve a certain respect and dignity, and that includes being treated equally by the laws. And the punishments should be seen as a correction for an injustice and not as an occasion for a powerful person to vent his displeasure on those who have displeased him. So this is essential for the preservation of justice, that punishments be seen not to be motivated by anger, but by the desire to correct what are the actual violations of justice. Violations of the law.
[00:06:47] Speaker B: Right. Very good. And I, I would add to that that I, I. It's interesting to see these set of reflections on anger which we might associate with a great spirited Men who are in qu. Inclined to seek glory and to practice, to demonstrate their courage through, through battle and through conflict may also be inclined to anger. And here Cicero recommends again the rational rule of anger. To act, to sacrifice, maybe the demands of anger in your own case to the good of the republic, to the need to behave in such a way that the state is seen to as well as possible. But he goes on about it. He has quite a lot to say about anger, especially in punishment. He praises and builds up it's most glorious and noble to be easily appeased. So we might think that the man who's conscious of his own greatness and nobility is the most deeply offended and therefore needs to extract the most from those he punishes. And first, Cicero says first, that's not the way it is. If you can walk away from it, it's even loftier, is it not? Even more praiseworthy. But then, for all the perhaps superstition or gossip about Cicero being derivative, he's willing to just take on Aristotle and the peripatetics quite directly. They made a mistake by saying that anger is the kind of thing that can be done moderately. It's best to have no anger whatsoever in your system of punishment, to only punish out of a sense of fairness. So this rigorous equality before the law, but also anger, he says, has no place in judgment and in punishment.
That's a kind of bold new territory to go into. So, Ben, any further thoughts on that?
[00:08:29] Speaker C: On that score at the very end there, the connection with the rule of law, the statesman's trying to implement the rule of law.
One of the, you know, the idea of the rule of law is, you know, that we are governed by the law and the law represents kind of settled judgment, reason, not passion, not arbitrary will of whoever happens to be in charge. Right. And so one of, like someone like Thomas Hobbes objections to the very notion of the rule of law is that at the end of the day, the interpretation of law, the enforcement of law, they're going to come down to the rule of meant. Somebody's going to be doing those tasks. And so this is kind of actually an interesting potential solution, you know, to say, okay, the. The person has to be kind of acting like the laws when they are enforcing the laws. Right. They have to be passionate, you know, or have their passions under control, especially their anger. So that's a really interesting piece there.
[00:09:24] Speaker D: One thing I think I remember Catherine
[00:09:25] Speaker C: Bradshaw, who was one of the co hosts earlier in the. In this series, saying that Julius Caesar was kind of known for exhibiting this forgiveness on occasion, right. To his political enemies. You know, once you kiss the ring and you know, go through the.
Once I've defeated you, right, then I can be magnanimous and be forgiving. Right. That was just an interesting piece there.
One more couple of quick points. I mean, yes, the electioneering thing is really interesting.
And Aristotle actually considered elections to be one of an example of an oligarchic institution as opposed to a democratic institution, because it was tended to be reserved for the people of a great name or something like that, or wealth or who could do well in them.
And I believe the American founders, in their first few presidential elections, first one or two at least, kind of tried to let other people do the electioneering for them. Right.
To cultivate this idea of this is not something that we want to get into the habit of going out and giving stump speeches for ourselves. There's something unseemly about that.
And then last point I'll make. This is a bit of a side note, but the note in our text says that his allusion to Plato here, Plato's Republic, and the example of the sailors jostling and competing with each other. You know, Cicero's making a great point which is kind of akin to a loyal opposition idea. It's that, hey, you know, don't treat as fellow members of your polity, maybe people who are competing against you in an election or something like that, or. Or who are taking their turn at being the consul and ruling differently than you would. Don't treat them as enemies, argue against
[00:11:06] Speaker D: them, but be civil.
[00:11:08] Speaker C: You know, that's a great point, but our text notes that that's not really the point Plato's making in the Republic. Right. If I recall, I looked at it briefly this morning and I think he's trying to say something. He's given the example of why philosophers kind of have a hard time convincing people that they're actually able to rule. Well, because, you know, the people in his sort of example of the ship, it's an example where people don't know how to run a ship and they all end up just Competing. The sailors all end up fighting each other and competing each other for the top slot. And the person who actually has spent time studying how to run a ship, you know, and all the naval, you know, all the, the air and the sea conditions, you have to know.
He sounds like he's talking nonsense to them because he's not very good at jostling his way to the top. Right. And so anyway, there's something else going on with Plato, but nevertheless, it's a
[00:11:57] Speaker D: good point Cicero is making.
[00:11:59] Speaker C: It just may not be the point Plato was making.
[00:12:01] Speaker A: Yeah, I think that's right. So Cicero is making some room for competitive politics. And we should listen to opposition. We should listen to people who have other opinions about what the best course of action is and not see them as if they were taking up arms against us. Whereas for Plato, the analogy of the ship is Plato's way of saying democracy just doesn't work.
The people don't have any idea what they're doing. And you need to leave the decision making to the experts.
[00:12:38] Speaker B: Right, exactly.
Ethan, I'd like you to read the next part. I think we'll do sections, chapters 91 and 90 and 91, if you don't mind. I'll do the first comment and then we'll Finish with chapter 92.
[00:12:51] Speaker A: So 90 and 91.
[00:12:53] Speaker B: Yes, please.
[00:12:54] Speaker A: Okay.
When things are going well, and as we would wish, we should make a great effort to avoid haughtiness, scorn and arrogance. Unreliability is revealed as much in reacting excessively to success as to adversity.
It is a splendid achievement to face all of life with equanimity, never altering the expression of one's face, as we hear that Socrates and Gaius Lilius did.
Philip, King of Macedon, may have been surpassed in deeds and glory by his son, but I note that he was both more affable and more humane. Philip, therefore, was always a great man, while Alexander often acted most dishonorably. They seem to give us good advice then, who warn that that the more we excel, the more humbly we should behave. According to Panettius, his pupil and friend. Africanus used to say that when frequent skirmishing has made horses fierce and high spirited, men are accustomed to give them to trainers so that they may have gentle mounts to ride.
Similarly, men whom success has made unbridled and overconfident should be led into the training ring of reason and learning, so that they perceive the frailty of human affairs and the variability of fortune. Even in times of extreme good fortune, we very much need to make use of our friends counsel. And it is then more than previously that we should attribute to them authority.
At this time too, we must beware of giving ear to flatterers, or of allowing ourselves to be fawned upon. It is easy to be fooled in this, for we think that we are the kind of people who ought to be praised. Consequently, countless blunders arise when such opinions so inflate men that they become the objects of dishonorable mockery and fall into serious errors. So much for that subject.
[00:14:53] Speaker B: Thank you very much, Ethan. Yeah. This is a shorter set of chapters, but one in which we hear here an argument for humility which we normally associate with not a Roman, but a Christian virtue.
Humility here, though advised as part of the office of the great right. If you really are a great spirited man who wants to do great things, to be seen to do great things, to be admired and praised long after your death for the great things that you've done, you ought to, in service of your doing greatness, be humble. And the reason here being that you can fall into the trap of being.
He praises Philip, of course, for being more affable and humane, and therefore superior in greatness to his son who excelled him in conquest.
The more we excel, the more humbly we should behave. It's the great metaphor of the horses, right? When a horse is high spirited, it's very good, but give it to the trainers, let them break it in for you so that you can ride it sort of to glory yourself. You should be like the horse, right? Too high spirited, too much thinking, too much of itself is going to sort of overshoot the mark. Maybe an Aristotelian idea here at play.
And then chapter 91, a short chapter about we need to adhere to the advice of our friends. Even more so when we are doing well. It might be the time when you would think you would least need the advice of friends. Because things are going well, you've actually succeeded. You're achieving on your own merits. That's just when you most need to take the good counsel of your friends and to avoid flattery. And as he says, this is. This is maybe one of the hazards at the very top level of performance is that because you know yourself and think yourself correctly to be someone who deserves praise, you're not able to discern well motivated praise from your friends, from the flattering and fawning praise of your false friends.
[00:16:52] Speaker A: So,
[00:16:54] Speaker B: Ben, would you like to take first?
[00:16:57] Speaker D: Sure.
[00:16:59] Speaker C: I can't remember exactly, but I'm thinking of a quotation from some politician or writer that is about how every political career ends in failure.
This is an interesting point that, hey, just when you have succeeded or when things seem to be going really well, there's a special danger that the leader of state has to be careful about or even just the person who's trying to be, you know, do his duty and be a good man.
It just seems like a sort of wise thing.
It's also interesting that, you know, with stoicism, I tend to think, you know, he's talking here about an equanimity of spirit that kind of goes along with this stoic attitude that he's sometimes channeling here. We tend to think of when bad things happen, you can kind of be solid and you can kind of weather the storm and you can sort of develop an integrity that allows you to persevere. But it's interesting here that he says you have to maintain that even when times seem to be good and you're going to tend to kind of run away with yourself a little bit and get too puffed up and accept what is actually flattery and all these things. Right. And so it's just a very interesting admonition here to. And it's even interesting it struck me that he specifically says, watch how your, the expression of your face. You know, make sure you, your, your face is not.
[00:18:21] Speaker D: Yeah.
[00:18:21] Speaker C: You're maintaining kind of a calm, cool, collected demeanor. You know, you, you don't want to be too, you know, kind of exuberant or joyful. It's just, you know, play it cool. And it's interesting that he and I, and I. It is funny that he talks about Alexander. Right. Alexander does seem to be a kind of up and down kind of person. Right. And so it's an interesting point.
And then.
So I just do think it's just an interesting thing to think about. Yeah. How do you handle success? And that can be just as challenging as handling a challenge or failure.
[00:18:55] Speaker A: Yeah. A few things here that come to mind.
First of all, again, the recommendation which he's made again here, that one appear affable and humane and not show anger and essentially don't show emotion. Don't show that you have been buffeted by whatever just happened, which is the opposite of what I think the recommendation is for politicians today. They're supposed to show emotion. They're supposed to show that they're just like us and they react in the same way to things that we do. Whereas the way the gentleman maintains authority is by not showing that emotion, by showing that he is, in a sense above it all. And he can handle it. He can handle things that the rest of us cannot.
So that's one thing that occurs to me. And then also there's perhaps some irony here.
So the great man does not have to trumpet his achievements.
He should let the achievements speak for themselves and not promote himself.
That's a bit ironic when we think about Cicero himself, who is known for his self promotion, especially in his oratory.
So that's maybe a little bit ironic. But I think maybe the main point here, and both of you have said this, is this is about self control.
The great man needs to not become haughty so that he doesn't lose control of himself.
Even if he has been successful, he should remain humble and not assume that that success will continue and not listen only to flatterers who tell him what he wants to hear just because he has been successful so far. So humility seems like a matter of prudence. This is how the great man stays on track, by not assuming that his success so far is going to continue, so that he has to be willing to listen to critical advice as well as praise.
[00:21:00] Speaker B: Right. I'd say it's an interesting approach to humility, that you must be humble so that you can continue to be great. Right. If you fail to be properly humble, you will lose your greatness and you don't want that. But that, that's still the sort of primary object of your. Of your striving, isn't it?
Well, I think we're left here with section 92, and I think it's my.
Is it my turn to read?
[00:21:25] Speaker A: I think so.
[00:21:25] Speaker B: No, so I'm trying to remember here, and I've now lost track of whose turn it is to comment. I think. Ben. Ben, first comment. Let's go.
All right.
Our judgment should be that the achievements which are greatest and show the greatest spirit are those of the men who rule the Republic.
For their government reaches extremely widely and affects the greatest number.
Many men of great spirit, however, have lived and still live lives of leisure.
Some, limiting themselves to their own business, investigate and examine great matters of some kind.
Others have taken a middle course between philosophy and the administration of the Republic, enjoying their own personal wealth. They neither increase this by every possible method, nor prevent those close to them from making use of it, sharing it rather with friends and the Republic too, if the need arise.
Their wealth should, in the first place be well won and not dishonorably or invidiously acquired.
Secondly, it should be increased by reason, industriousness, thrift.
Thirdly, it should be available for the benefit of as many as possible, provided they are worthy of it, and be at the command, not of lust and luxury, but of liberality and beneficence.
A man who observes these rules may live not only in a grand, impressive and spirited manner, but also with simplicity and trustworthiness, a true friend of other men.
[00:23:11] Speaker C: Well, one thing that strikes me here is that while he does have a clear preference for the.
[00:23:18] Speaker D: Those of the greatest spirit and achievement
[00:23:19] Speaker C: who are ruling the Republic and putting into practice all the things he's been talking about, he kind of allows for some flexibility in terms of what a good life that is still fulfilling duties looks like. Right. It could be a life of relative leisure and calm that's not out there, you know, leading the Republic, but nevertheless it's, you know, the wealth of this person is available to the.
[00:23:44] Speaker D: To serve others, to serve his friends
[00:23:47] Speaker C: for the benefit of others.
And it's not too much luxury.
It's not too little right to be
[00:23:55] Speaker D: able to have things to share with others.
[00:23:56] Speaker C: It's this mean picture he's talking about. So. And also just the ending here with friendship. I mean, and at one point, he did talk about as one of the, you know, most worthy kinds of connections and loyalties we might have as to our.
Our friends who are similarly seeking to be good and seeking to follow in the path of duty. And so it's a nice ending there.
[00:24:21] Speaker A: It's a return to a theme that he's discussed before, the problem of the statesman who has been driven out of politics. He is not able to participate. He is not able to practice his craft to the full extent, but he can still manage his wealth properly and use it to the extent that he is able for the benefit of the Republic and for the benefit of friends. And that is still using wealth properly to serve others as a statesman.
Ultimately, that's what a statesman is to do, is to serve others. And so even if he cannot administer the government at a certain time, he still has other roles that he can perform that are consistent with that greatness of spirit that he's been defending.
[00:25:15] Speaker B: Yeah, I agree. It's interesting to think of the biographical connection here.
I thought we might think of this chapter as presenting us with three characters.
The true statesman, the one who has the greatest spirit and the most glorious achievement. And that's the men who rule, the men who rule the Republic kind of at the other end of the scale, the men of leisure. And I think he associates leisure here with philosophy. This is the Platonic philosophical life. When he says men they investigate some matter or another. He's thinking, I think, of intellectual practices, of sort of the philosophical contemplation, aloof from the world.
And I notice he.
He calls them men of great spirit, but he doesn't praise them in the sense this seems like somebody who set the slider all the way to zero in terms of his public concern, not really fulfilling the duties of a statesman. But one can be.
Take this middle path and be both a scholar and a statesman, a philosopher, a man of leisure and some wealth, provided he gives the rules.
Wealth has to be honorably won, can't be rapaciously taken. It has to be put at the service of the state when necessity requires, and it should benefit many people. Well, here's a way that you can be great while you still, we might say, are not perhaps fully committed to, or perhaps, as you said, Ethan, are arbitrarily excluded from actual, actual rule. This is the sort of the portrait of the philosopher statesman who's able to get right what Plato got wrong with his portrait of the aloof philosopher king.
[00:26:53] Speaker A: And there's also, as you mentioned, there's another topic that he's going to return to.
There are right and wrong ways to acquire wealth, and he's going to have more to say about that, especially for a statesman. He's going to have more to say about that later on.
[00:27:09] Speaker B: Ben, any final thoughts?
[00:27:11] Speaker C: Well, maybe y' all could help me out. Just this last phrase here or this last sentence.
[00:27:15] Speaker D: A man who observes these rules may
[00:27:17] Speaker C: live not only in a grand, impressive
[00:27:20] Speaker D: and spirited manner, but also with simplicity and trustworthiness.
[00:27:24] Speaker C: So as he's saying, I sort of read that to.
[00:27:26] Speaker D: To be referring to that third path.
[00:27:28] Speaker C: He was. That sort of middle path he was talking about that combines, you know, this, you know, the acquiring of some wealth to. To be able to share with friends and the republic. But also there it is also, in a sense, a life of simplicity and trustworthiness. Or are you saying he's got two different. Is that the philosopher has the simple, trustworthy life that is simple and is not seeking to acquire wealth? I guess I'm asking, do y' all
[00:27:56] Speaker D: think those are two different paths he's
[00:27:58] Speaker C: describing in that last sentence? Or are those that third path?
[00:28:04] Speaker A: I think he's referring to that third path there.
[00:28:07] Speaker C: Okay.
[00:28:08] Speaker B: Yeah.
[00:28:08] Speaker C: I don't know how I.
Yeah, I
[00:28:11] Speaker B: think keep in mind that he's writing this to his son, who is. I think, if I read the beginning of the book correctly, he's worried that his son studying philosophy in Athens might be more too much inclined to the abstract philosophical pursuits and neglect the sort of the great spiritedness, the glory of politics as an arena for the great spirited man.
And so he's recommending, well, look, if you want to be simple and trustworthy, the sort of virtues of the philosopher who knows and speaks only the truth, you don't have to retreat from the world to do that. You can, provided that you have a certain kind of attitude towards your wealth, that you use it in a certain way, you can be one of this third type of man. So that seems to me to be what he's praising, maybe especially for the benefit of his son, young Marcus, that you can have it all. You can have both be rich and humble, simple.
Well, I think that brings us to the end of Chapter 92 of Book 1 of Cicero's On Duties and the end of this treatment of greatness, of spirit. The next major topic for the remainder of book one is going to be this fourth virtue of seemliness or decorum. Looking forward to talking about that with you gentlemen and with some other. Some other co hosts in the weeks ahead.
I want to thank my co hosts today, Ethan Alexander Davy and Ben Peterson.
You've been listening to the On Duties podcast, a production of the Ciceronian Society. We hope you'll tune in next Wednesday for another episode. Thank you. Goodbye.
